Unlike gerrard and lampard . Scholes actually did have some good games for england . One that stands out in particular was in the euros against france . Scholes gave zidane and co the run around . England were in control of that match and winning it until Scholes was substitued . Zidane then took control of the game and France won . Also under Glen Hoddle and Kevin Keegan Scholes had some very good games. It was only under the idiot management of Sven where Sven preferred those 2 headless chickens Lampard in Gerrard that Scholes performances suffered . I don't think I can recall Lampard or Gerrard playing one good game for England . I never rated either Lampard or Gerrard . Lampard was a glorified striker who nothin but score in goals .He did nothing in midfield . Take away his goals and he was a chamionship player . Gerrard was a headless chicken who would run around in games for Liverpool like a headless chicken .He would play the odd decent hollywood ball or score a screamer from yards every now and then the english media would christen him a midfield masestro . I
Ok maybe I am doing Gerrard and Lampard of diservice as footballers . But the point I am trying to make is that they were never great footballers. Gerrard took all the plaudits for Liverpool for their success but it was the spanish midfielder Alonso who ran the midfield and who provided all the creativity and invention in the team . Frank Lampard played in great defensive team with Terry and Makele and great attacking players like Duff Robben and Ballack who could feed him the ball. The fact of the matter is the reason England have struggled in tournaments in recent times is that they have produced many players like gerrard, beckham lampard in recent times and not enough technically gifted players like gascoigne, scholes hoddle and charlton etc. You seem to be going in the right direction now with more technically gifted players coming up now like grealish,loftus cheek, barkley, hughes , barkley , foden , roberts , winks etc . Its players like that who will allow to keep the ball and challenge the big boys. Unfortunately at the moment you have a manager who doesen't value creative midfielders . Your most creative players available to you in wilshere, shelvey , hughes aren't even in the squad which means you won't be able to hold on to the ball or create chanes for vardy and kane etc when you meet the better teams .
Both Lampard and Gerrard were great midfielders for their clubs, and very good for England at times. The issue was there was never a manager strong enough to have them playing in roles that were for the benefit of the team - there was never a manager strong enough to drop one or play one out of position in order to make the team better balanced.
They were great players for their clubs because they had more technically players around them to hide their short comings . And what top international teams would Gerrard and Lampard have walked in to . They wouldn't of been starters for the likes of france, holland, brazil, spain, argentina, germany . Paul Scholes was the only player in the team who would push for a starting place in any top international team and he had to play second fiddle to Lampard and Gerrard who wouldn't get near a world eleven
in all honestly, neither ever performed for England. International tempo does not suit them. I agree it could have worked if only one of them was playing, with somebody more technical like Scholes in the middle to dictate the tempo.
Lampard was excellent between 2003-2006 for England, even when we were unbalanced. Gerrard did less well but think it's harsh to criticise him too much
Your two paragraphs contradict each other. 1 - They were only great because they had technical players around them 2 - They wouldn't get into teams with better technical players. Surely players with their skills would have flourished in better teams where they could play like they did so succesfully for their clubs?
Can't agree with that, take the euro 2004 for instance he really struggled : he scored goals but couldn't keep the ball under pressure, which was spectacular against France or Portugal.
My point is that Gerrard and Lampard were suited to a British style of play . A high tempo get the ball forward game . Neither would have flourished in the european leagues where midfielders need to be able to keep the ball under pressure and play a passing game . I couldn't imagine Gerrard playing for spain or brazil when every time he would get the ball he would play it long . It just wouldn't work it would upset the whole possession based game and Lampard would be the same . To prove my point how many British players have suceeded abroad Waddle , Hoddle . I can't think of much else . Gareth Bale has struggled in the spanish league even though he was a star in the premier league . The same with David Beckham . He was a fish out of water in the spanish league and all he could offer were hollywood balls . He was a flop in the real madrid team and the real madrid fans depised his kick and rush style . Very successful in the premier league but you need more than deep crosses and long ball to make it in the spanish league
That's complete BS though. He was well-liked by Real Madrid fans, and when Capello froze him out of the team the players begged him to bring him back.
I wonder whose sock you are? Only ever appear around tournament time just to bash England and English players.
Yet Lampard was atrocious in WC 2006, while Gerrard was perhaps the best English player in Euro 2012.
He was, although couldn't prevent Italy's complete domination in midfield. Scott Parker & Milner alongside him didn't help though.
Dont talk pap. Beckham was a brilliant technical player..one of the best passers of the ball in the world..the real madrid players even commented that beckham was a much better player than they had thought and had a successful career at real..i cant be bothered commenting on the rest of the rubbish you're talking
First of all I miss Prenn. Secondly I think a Carrick or even a Barry of 8 years ago would have been the most important player in this team, never mind Lampard or Gerrard. I have never ss3n such a dearth of midfield talent for England, I'm not knocking the likes of Henderson or Dier good teams often have players like them but they would have been there for squad depth in the past.
It seems we often have evolution of talent in certain areas and not others Right now we have world class forwards or potential superstars in advanced positions but a lack of any world class cm or cbs compared to before We always la led wingers and after seaman, a class keeper I guess it depends on the type of players influencing the kids as they grow up. This is the absolute attack era where as the older generation grew up watching much better cms and cbs which may influence where kids want to play etc?
Carrick was a wonderful passer of the ball but he had certain limitations to his game which prevented him from becoming a world class midfielder . Whenever he was pressed by the opposition he would play backwards passes or he wouldn't make himself available for a pass. I think that's the main reason why successive England managers rarely picked him for the team . They knew his limitations.